[jubjub]

Immigrants could face Treaty test


13.11.05 7.45am
By Teresa O'Connor



Auckland Regional council is urging the Government to give it a say in national immigration policy - including introducing Treaty of Waitangi tests for immigrants.

The council says it should have a bigger say in immigration policy because most new Kiwis live in the region.

It says many of Auckland's problems with housing, infrastructure and overflowing schools have been caused by erratic immigration policies.

Regional planning and strategy committee chairman Paul Walbran said the council was also concerned that too many immigrants were flocking to Auckland, rather than other areas.

"We are saying to government if there is not some guidance about where settlement patterns happen, then Auckland will become overloaded," he said.

"Immigration is already a contributing component to traffic congestion here and the load that has been placed on other infrastructure is unsustainable."

Mr Walbran said the council also believed that migrants needed to be more aware of cultural issues, including a knowledge of the Treaty of Waitangi and human rights legislation, particularly regarding women and children.

It has suggested a simple test, before citizenship is granted. "This is not an effort to be politically correct and we don't want immigrants to be Kiwi clones," said Mr Walbran. "But immigrants should have a general understanding about important factors that make up the Kiwi way of life and the Treaty is part of that."

Immigration consultants believe such a test would put up a "hopeless barrier".

Bill Milnes, director of Access Immigration NZ, described the proposal as ludicrous.

"It's like a New Zealand journalist going to work for National Geographic in the United States and being expected to study a treaty with Sioux Indians signed 150 years ago at the same time they are trying to organise moving family, shifting house, visa processes, police checks and negotiating with employers."

South African immigrant and Auckland lawyer Prajna Moodley has welcomed the suggestion, but wants to see it extended to all New Zealanders.

It was hypocritical to expect new migrants to pass such a test, when many New Zealand were either ambivalent or hostile about such issues, he said.

Dr Ranginui Walker, formerly Professor of Maori Studies at the University of Auckland and a leader of the Auckland and NZ Maori Councils, has also accused the council of hypocrisy.

It would be far more beneficial to Maori people if councils required candidates standing for local body elections to undergo training on the Treaty of Waitangi.

"What's the point of creating this if there's no way of enforcing it? That's why I suspect such a plan is just a little bit of window dressing to make the council look good."

The Department of Labour, which deals with immigration, did not want to comment on the issue.

However, deputy secretary Mary Anne Thompson said it was working closely with Auckland's local government agencies, including the regional council, on settlement issues.

Ms Thompson said Auckland attracted the most migrants because it was New Zealand's biggest city with greater work opportunities. In the year to June, 38 per cent of skilled migrants with a job settled in the region.

The department already encouraged skilled migrants to settle outside Auckland by allocating extra points if they lived elsewhere in New Zealand, she said.

[Avalon]

Well, certainly bears thinking about.

My thoughts are that it may be a bit much for new arrivals - as one quote says - you have enough to think about. But for Citizenship? using the US as an example - dont you have to pass a citizenship exam?

I probably wouldnt object to having to do this for Citizenship. I kinda feel that Im asking New Zealand to give me something pretty special when they give me a passport, so I really wouldnt object to having to prove that I actualy undersatnd something of thier country first. I mean - I get only 1 year to pass the driving test to be allowed to drive here leaglly.

Just my thoughts.

[GeorgeM]

I probably wouldnt object to having to do this for Citizenship. I kinda feel that Im asking New Zealand to give me something pretty special when they give me a passport, so I really wouldnt object to having to prove that I actualy undersatnd something of thier country first.
The big problem with anything Treaty related is that it is entirely politically laden.

Swatting up on the place of the Treaty of Waitangi in modern NZ would merely be learning to write a few platitudes which corresponded to the feelings of a few people in the current administration.

The views you would be forced to put down would be out of step with the vast majority of native NZers (i.e. those who were actually born here, regardless of race). Poll after poll after poll show a huge majority against the current official (read "Government" or "Labour") line on the place and the importance of the Treaty.

[Gran]

On the radio this morning Helen said very firmly that the govt is in charge of immigration not the Auckland Regional Council !!!!!!

[Avalon]

Good for her!

George -
I was more thinking of a "citizenship exam" in general terms which I would not object to. I aggree that basing citizenship on a small area of life here is a bit pointless, so if thats all they wanted to know then I just wouldnt see the point - and probably be a miffed. I wouldnt objuect to there being questions in an overall test that centered on the treaty - but for my money - it then has to be questions about whether you understand that the treaty exists - rather than your personal view on it.

For example - I still cant really see that the Treaty is doing anyone here any favours, so on that basis - id get kicked out I assume ;) - but I do know the basics of what the treaty is (only really the sort of stuff you can get out of Te Papa).

[GeorgeM]

I was more thinking of a "citizenship exam" in general terms which I would not object to.
I can see both sides of this. It depends very much on how it is set - pointless facts or things of importance to the nature of society which virtually every native born NZer would be able to answer. I tried the examples based on the UK test (on the BBC website) and even with what I considered to be a good knowledge of british history and of current UK society and politics I still got some wrong (which I modestly put down to the way in which the questions were framed :p ). In many ways if someone has qualified for PR and then has lived here for 5 years then a few questions which not all NZers might be able to answer may not be of any use to anyone.

I wouldnt objuect to there being questions in an overall test that centered on the treaty - but for my money - it then has to be questions about whether you understand that the treaty exists - rather than your personal view on it.

For example - I still cant really see that the Treaty is doing anyone here any favours, so on that basis - id get kicked out I assume ;) - but I do know the basics of what the treaty is (only really the sort of stuff you can get out of Te Papa).
I think that the problem with anything to do with the treaty is that it has been made so emotive over the last couple of decades. It is probably the single most divisive article in the whole of NZ these days (even more so that Winston's speech book!) - better to restrict any questions to the date and place of signing - anything else from thereon would be contentious and often a matter of conjecture.